After having read The Jungle over the summer (or perhaps the past week) I'm very interested in hearing your reactions to it. We will begin the year by having a class discussion on Summer Reading work that you have completed.
But before we do, I'd like to get the conversation started here on your reactions to the novel. Comment on at least one of the following questions: What was the most important or most memorable scene to you? What meaning or message is Sinclair trying to portray in The Jungle? Is the story effective, realistic, or reliable?
You are required to make ONE comment of your own and to write ONE reply to another person's comment.
Remember, once you post and do the minimum, don't hesitate to check in again to see reactions to your post, and or to post again in some fashion.
To be honest, while reading chapter after chapter of The Jungle, I couldn't believe the countless number of hardships Jurgis and his family endured. For example, after hitting Connor the first time, Jurgis loses his house, his wife and his newborn child die, and he can’t find a job because he’s been “blacklisted”; things can’t seem to be worse. However soon afterward, little Antanas drowns in the waist-deep streets (pages 231, 239, and 257). In addition, I had a difficult time believing the gruesome and gory details about the meatpacking system. Sinclair, when describing how there was no sanitary precautions, writes, “The men who worked on the killing beds would come to reek with foulness...there was simply no such thing as keeping decent...There was not even a place where a man could wash his hands, and the men ate as much raw blood as food at dinnertime” (126). These working and living conditions shocked me. How could these things have happened? But that is exactly why Sinclair’s book is effective. At the very least, myself, and other readers, walk away from the book and wonder if people were truly treated this way, if the packers actually had this much power, if the workers and their families actually breathed, ate, and slept in such filth. Even if a reader is skeptical, they want to know if these conditions really did exist. This same questioning mindset obviously took place when the book was first published in 1906; people were appalled by what Sinclair wrote and the Pure Food Act was quickly put into place in the same year. Thus, Sinclair achieved his goal: he shocked the reader with such horrible details that made the reader want to see if they were actually true. He made them ask the “How’s” and “Whys?”, and thus, he encouraged people to challenge the ways of society.
ReplyDeleteEmily T.
I definitely agree with Emily! The working conditions Jurgis experienced at the Durham's slaughterhouse shocked me. "The floor was half an inch dep with blood, in spite of the best efforts of the men who kept shoveling it through holes" (41). The dangerous, low-light working space where men slaughtered countless animals was especially dangerous, as Sinclair describes that most men working in the killing beds had no or no usage in their thumbs. It almost does seem surreal, the hardships and working conditions these people underwent. Another example of the horrific working conditions can be found on pages eleven and twelve. The following quote describes Mikolas, a beef-boner, and his contraction of blood poisoning on the job.
Delete"Your hands are slippery, and your knife is slippery, and you are toiling like mad, when somebody happens to speak to you, or you strike a bone. Then your hand slips up on the blade, and there is a fearful gash. And that would not be so bad, only for the deadly contagion. The cut may heal, but you never can tell. Twice now, within the last three years, Mikolas has been lying home with blood poisoning-once for three months and once for nearly seven. The last time, too, he lost his job, and that meant six weeks more of standing at the doors of the packing houses, at six o'clock on bitter winter mornings, with a foot of snow on the ground and more in the air" (11).
The idea that something as horrible as this could occur due to the lack of sanitation in the workplace without any benefits for employees is baffling. I one hundred percent agree with you Emily; it is shocking to imagine these conditions and these occurrences not only happened, but were common during this time period.
I also agree with Emily of the book's effectiveness. The Jungle's released sparked a wave of reform not only in the meat-packing industry and the health/working standards in these establishments, but also created a trend of pro-socialism.
DeleteGood example from the wide range of both the disgusting sanitary conditions and the harsh working environment. As you read those sections, you seem to be shocked more and more as they take place. It is funny though with Sinclair's motive, he intended to spur a socialist movement, but instead he sparked outrage over the handling of meat/food.
DeleteI was interested by the use of socialism in the novel, and I find it interesting that Sinclair intended to support socialism by writing the book but spent such a small amount of time in the book focusing on the socialism movement itself. I believe that this was one of Sinclair's downfalls in the story, seeing that he intended to support socialism but really included so many gory details that caught the public attention. Sinclair himself said "I aimed at the public's heart, and by accident I hit it in the stomach." I think that he really intended to get the public interested in socialism but instead included too many details about the meatpacking industry, which was really what got the public's attention.
DeleteDespite the several memorable scenes that were found in Upton Sinclair's novel, by far the most shocking to me was the death of Ona and her unborn child. Jurgis, in desperate hopes to find a doctor to allow Ona to safely give birth to their second child, finally stumbles upon a private doctor named Madame Haupt. Refusing to aid Jurgis unless he pays her twenty-five dollars, she finally agrees to help the man after stalling for vital time in Ona's state of labor. When she finally arrives at the scene, after walking purposefully slowly, she is unable to help and leaves Ona and her child to die a painful death, her clothes spattered with blood stains as she exits. Despite the family's shock and immense grief, she continues to worry solely about the money. "'You understand me' she said, 'you pays me dot money yust the same!'" (200). It horrifies me that a person could ever witness the death of a mother and child and the destruction of an already broken family and still nag for her payment which she knows the family cannot afford. It is this state of pure greed and no care for others that shocked me and made it in particular the most memorable scene of the novel. This could also directly relate to Ona and Jurgis' marriage, where many of the guests would fill their stomachs with as much food as possible without giving money to the family, leaving Jurgis and Ona with bill of an entire year's salary (20). What did you guys think was the most memorable scene in your minds? Was there an example in the book that contradicted this greed and hunger for wealth and self-fullfillment?
ReplyDeleteYes, the book definitely focuses on greed and how it destroys society. However, the book also contains characters that aren’t driven by greed and selfishness. After Jurgis returns from jail, he not only has to grieve for the loss of his wife and child, he has to find another job, and soon because the rest of the family is starving. The family is in such a bad condition that even the children dig in the dumps for scraps of food. It is during this time that a much needed act of kindness occurs (248-250). A lady, who saw one of the children searching through trash, stops by the house and listens to Elzbieta and all the hardships she and the family have endured. Sinclair describes how the lady reacts and writes, “The pretty lady’s eyes filled with tears, and in the midst of it she burst into weeping…”(249). In addition, after her visit, she sends them a basket full of food and tells Jurgis of a friend that would most certainly give him a job at the steel works. This unknown character surprises me because she is one of very few who not only helps Jurgis and his family, but actually feels for them. She is moved to tears by their story! She does not throw them and their problems aside like the other rich people. She treats them like human beings. And, she tries to help them. She shows how not every capitalist in the book is a selfish person.
DeleteI disagree with Matt's evaluation of Madame Haupt. Yes it does seem a but selfish of her to give Jurgis such a hard time, especially since the readers have been follow his personal story of hardship up until this point. I honestly never once questioned that it was simply too late for Madame Haupt to save Ona and her baby. The woman came out and knew that she was only going to get about a dollar no matter if Ona and the baby lived or died so it just wouldn't make sense for her to let them die unless she was a completely heartless person. I don't think that Madame Haupt was being greedy or selfish because there wouldn't be much of a profit in it for her.
DeleteI am in between both Kelsey and Matt's points. On the one hand, I believe that it is unfair and greedy for Madame Haupt to originally disregard Jurgis when he doesn't have even close to the amount of money she charges, but her heart comes through in the end when she decides to see Ona anywise. But also, after she tries to save Ona and the baby, and fails, she doesn't hesitate to tell Jurgis about the money he still owes her when obviously he is grief stricken about the news of his wife and unborn baby's deaths.
DeleteI agree with you and think that this scene and the wedding scene that you mentioned really highlighted how badly everyone in that society struggled not just Jurgis' family. I don't think that any of the characters who cheated Jurgis or who were a bit over eager to take advantage of them really wanted to hurt the family, I think that they really were just struggling the same as Jurgis and Ona to make a living and that they had been forced to either eat or be eaten in 'the Jungle'. This plays into the name of the book and survival instincts that many characters such as Jack Duane took up in order to get by. So although I agree that this woman's actions were terrible, I think she has had to addapt the same as Jurgis did towards the end of the book and learned to think solely for herself.
DeleteThank you guys for all of your great feedback! I personally felt Madame Haupt was indifferent to Jurgis and his Lithuanian family, but I can understand everyone else's point of view! Can't wait to further discuss this scene in class!
DeleteOne interesting aspect from The Jungle that stands out to me is the tracing of Jurgis from start to finish. At the beginning he seems capable of conquering the world and takes on work with lightning speed and efficiency. Yet his seemingly unbreakable body and spirit slowly erode and he is certainly only a shadow of his once strong and proud self after being chewed up and spit out by Packingtown.
ReplyDeleteIn addition, his working in the fertilizer plant was probably one of the most memorable scenes, as well as the details of rotten or spoiled meat being sent back and then later pickled or made into sausage only to be resold as fine. Scary stuff. Makes you think about the life of our products from start to finish...
I think that this is showing one of the most important points in the book. It shows how much being over-worked and under paid can take a toll on you mentally and physically. Jurgis and his family moved to America because they believed it was a great opportunity to start a new life. Little did they know that city of Packingtown would change their idea of what the "New World" meant to them forever. Also, it brings out the fact that workers worked very hard in terrible conditions, but no one could speak up to say how unfair it was. If they complained or didn't show up, their position would be readily filled with someone else. Not only does this book touch upon the aspect of health concerns in the meat packing industry, but also the worker's health and rights as well. I feel that this book was meant to show both aspects equally, meaning that everyone's health is affected if action is not taken.
DeleteI would agree with you that the fertilizer plant is one of the most memorable parts of the book just because it is just the lowest and most depressing part in the book. It is sad when his wife and kid died but by that time in the book it is kind of expected. When Jurgis has to work at the fertilizer plant it just seems like the shattering of all their hopes in America. He is making less the he probably could in Lithuania, he has to work in incredibly dangerous and discussing conditions, and even when he is not at work he smells terrible and can’t taste anything except the crud he has to shovel all day.
DeleteI would disagree about the stuff they put in the food being that memorable though. mainly because it happened a hundred years ago, but also the fact that even though there was some nasty things put in the mix it was divided up over thousands of sausages. In the end a bunch of tiny flavored pieces of beef aren’t all that different then a bunch of tiny flavored pieces of rats.
I thought that this story was overall a very realistic story, and I was amazed by the horrific practices of the meat packing industry. I know that Sinclair went undercover in the industry to write this book, and I think that the descriptions of the meatpacking conditions were reliable and realistic. However, I had one problem with the reliability of this book. I knew that Sinclair was a socialist, which is why I found the last few chapters of the book unreliable. The Jungle was originally posted as a serial in a socialist newspaper, and Sinclair ran for Congress on the socialist ticket. I thought that most of the book was reliable, but the end seemed very pro-socialism, and a little bit biased. I liked the idea of Jurgis finding a cause that he felt so passionate about, and I think that socialism did change Jurgis's life for the better, but since this was written by a socialist, I think that the negatives of socialism were mostly ignored.
ReplyDeleteI definitely agree with Melissa here in many aspects.. I know that Sinclair went undercover in the industry, however, many times i found it impossible to believe. Sinclair describes Jurgis' struggles so vividly, and in such a convincing manner that you have to believe they are true. However, it left me with so many questions. Could Sinclair have over exaggerated when it came to the minute details? I feel like he always wrote about the worst possible scenario. It is unlikely that these strokes after strokes of bad luck could have happened to Sinclair himself. Perhaps he took all of the bad experience that he encountered, added all the bad experiences of those he met while undercover, added a little more, and then had them all happen to Jurgis. When it comes to the politics, I also agree. In the book, Jurgis does some very shady political things that are certainly not admirable, and it all occurs while working for other parties. It is no coincidence that Sinclair would include this, adding fuel to the anti-republican or anti-democratic fire. Of course, other real political negatives were ignored, but I also feel that Sinclair used a lot of propaganda in this book (positive as well as negative).
DeleteI agree with Melissa and Morgan, I feel that while the book seemed very realistic and reliable because he went undercover the fact that his brought his own emotions into his writing could have easily lead to some minor or even major exaggeration. Like Morgan pointed out the book often felt like a collection of worst case scenarios, after so many it became difficult to believe that much poor luck could be brought to a singular person or even a whole family. I think that even slight exaggeration can take away from all the meaning behind something. If a reader discovers an author exaggerated all of the sudden everything they said is overlooked and seen as unimportant, while the majority of it may have actually been true. For instance, if someone found out nobody was actually eaten by rats, people might start to think that life in that day wasn't that bad because the Jungle was a complete exaggeration, all because of one small fib. I really hope that Sinclair was keeping all this in mind while documenting his experience because he seems to be quite reliable as of now and I would hate to find him to be otherwise.
DeleteI agree with all three of you, but I do feel that maybe he was using the lack of worker's rights as a plug for Socialism. Towards the second half of the book, Jurgis learns that the Socialists were in favor of unions which supported rights for workers. Perhaps the author exaggerated the awful living and working conditions for workers and their families in order to gain support of unions and encourage workers to go on strike until policies were changed.
DeleteCan't help but agree with the above comments about how the plight of Jurgis is never ending, almost to the point of it being comical. In literally having every potential negative thing that could possibly happen take place to Jurgis, it begins to lose its impact after a while. Similar with being eaten by rats, or drowning in the street. One would think that you would knock the rats off of you and that you'd notice that you were drowning and get up out of the puddle. We will make sure to discuss these elements further in class.
DeletePersonally, it took me a while to figure out why exactly this book was called "The Jungle." Although this may be a strange response, this is what I interpreted it as. This was my answer to question 3c in the summer reading questions, so my apologies to Mr. Knets, who will read it twice!
ReplyDeleteThe author chose the title, The Jungle, for the book for many reasons. For one, the economic state of Chicago that Sinclair describes is strikingly similar to the habitat of an actual jungle. Each person in Chicago is different. They come from different economic backgrounds, each have immigrated from different countries, speak different languages, and have different ways of making a living. Although an odd analogy, this is extremely similar to a real-world natural ecosystem. In an actual jungle, there are many different animals. They all speak different languages or have different ways of communicating. They are all of different breeds, different shapes and sizes with different means for survival. Within each pack there are natural alpha leaders, those who are given the utmost respect, and those animals who do not respect them do not survive; just like their human counterparts, who are met with violent resistance when they act out. Additionally, the various animal species live amongst each other, but they all know their boundaries. While some species are stronger and more dominant, others are closer to the bottom of the food chain. In Chicago, this same idea is demonstrated. Those closer to the bottom of the spectrum get poorer treatment, and understand that they must give respect to those at the top of the food chain. Unfortunately for those at the bottom, this often is literal – as many of them cannot afford to eat, while members of the high class feast using earnings that truly belong to the working people.
For those stuck in Packingtown, they must survive in this “jungle” with no means of escape or freedom, Sinclair explains that among those living in Packingtown, some claimed to be “Individualists,” and that idea “…was enough to make a mule laugh, to hear arguments like that; and yet it was no laughing matter, as you found out-for how many millions of such poor deluded wretches there were, whose lives had become so stunted by Capitalism that they no longer knew what freedom was! And they really thought that it was “Individualism” for tens of thousands of then to herd together and obey the orders of a steel magnate, and produce hundreds of millions of dollars of wealth for him…” (371).
I agree with you Morgan! I think that the book focuses on the power struggle between the lower class and the upper class. Throughout the book we did not see many examples of the two classes coming together helping each other except for when the wealthy women stumbles upon crippled Little Juozapas who was raking for food in Mike Scully’s dump. The women then proceed to go and meet the rest of the family and hear of their struggles and what they’ve faced in order to survive. The women then gave the family a very generous gift. “ The end of it was that the young lady sent then a basket of things to eat, and left a letter that Jurgis was to take to a gentleman who was the superintendent of the great steal- works in South Chicago.” He will get Jurgis something to do” (249,250). Another example of this is when Jurgis travels into the country after his son Antanas is killed. He comes across a farmhouse and is welcomed into a family’s home. There he buys his supper and is given a generous offer of work from the farmer, about a dollar a day and board. Jugris denies this offer but in doing this the farmer accepts Jurgis and does not judge him on the fact that he is homeless. Here we see that even though there may be a large class divide or in the jungle a difference in species, there are the heroic parts within these species that make a difference and help the classes come together and unite. These few individuals see the strain on society and help us see that not all of society is cruel and unjust. Although there are people of different background and upbringing, these people can come together and reform society for the better.
DeleteI feel that the novel The Jungle is a realistic view on how a family will sacrifice their health and wellbeing to benefit each other as a whole. At this point in the story Jurgis is recovering from losing his job at the killing beds due to injury. Jurgis and his family have little emotional or economic stability. Before applying to the fertilizer plant Elizabeta’s crippled child Kristoforas dies from eating smoked sausage. This smoked sausage was most likely produced at Browns and Durham’s factory. Some workers in the killing beds at Browns and Durham’s factory have to produce factory meat that does not pass the health code policy, a job Jurgis once held. While working this job I think Jurgis realized that you may have to go against your morals in order to survive in America. This is quite ironic because those who have now been effected are the ones who Jurgis sacrificed his morals for while working in the killing beds. The people he has supporter and will fight for in the future once recovered, are now being killed by their past way of survival. Out of desperation Jurgis applies to the Fertilizer plant “ he was a man, and would do his duty; he went and made application – but surely he was not also required to hope for success!” (157) By applying to this job knowing that he would be working in “ suffocating cellars” sawing bits of bones into different shapes and sizes. This sawing creates ammonia fumes that even by covering his mouth with a handkerchief he would eventually “run for his life, and come out half- dazed”(158). Out of love for his family Jurgis forfeits his health. This is completely unselfish and shows the loyalty he has for his struggling family.
ReplyDeleteI agree! This is a very interesting point about how the Jungle is realistic in a different and specific way, because it is focused on the family's sacrifices. When the family is having financial trouble or Ona isn't well, Jurgis always says that he will work harder. He suffered through his job at the fertilizer plant to support them. "And still Jurgis stuck it out! In spite of splitting headaches he would stagger down to the plant and take his stance once more, and begin to shovel in the blinding clouds of dust" (108). He would do anything to save and support his family, even when his health had to pay the price. I also agree with the statement that he is selfless and makes the sacrifices out of love. He ends up in jail for beating up Phil Connor, and suffers through jobs with horrible conditions because he loves and cares about his family so much.
DeleteVery nice comments about Jurgis and his motivation being love, loyalty, etc. all to provide for his family. Yet, he succumbs and is never rewarded for his hard work, caring nature, and devotion. Contrasted with his success as a criminal, the message is clear as Catherine stated: in order to survive and get ahead one can't be troubled with doing what is morally or ethically correct, it is a free for all existance that promotes greed and corruption according to Sinclair.
DeleteSo far, the above comments have stated how such poverty can make people do horrible things (stealing from people, gambling, drinking excessively, abandoning your family, etc) and, I agree with them. However, these acts are not what make me sad. It is the fact that when Jurgis, Ona, and others in the book give up their traditions and morals that they in turn give up their identities. For example, Jurgis is practically unrecognizable from the man who couldn't believe the ways to success in Packingtown: "...the man who told tales and spied upon his fellows would rise..." (75). He thought that all would be well if he simply 'worked harder!' (26). However, Jurgis starts to take bribes, he attacks men at night for their money, and more. For me, this is the real tragedy continuously portrayed in the book. In order to survive, people have to not only give their health and lives, but even who they are as people.
DeleteThe most memorable part of the book to me was the part where Sinclair describes all the jobs at the stockyards and all of their perils at the end of chapter nine. The various deadly and/or dangerous scenarios that the men are put through on an everyday basis are striking. People risk growing ill and accidental death by going to work every morning, and the worst part is that they are being paid next to nothing to take this risk, yet it is what people have to do in order to keep alive. The description that has stuck with me the most is about the men who work in the cooking rooms, "their particular trouble was that they fell into vats; and when they were fished out, there was never enough of them left to be worth exhibiting, sometimes they would be overlooked for days, till all but the bones of them had gone out to the world as Durham's Pure Leaf Lard!" (105). This shocked me because it is extremely disturbing and is horrible treatment of a living breathing human being, although they are no longer so after such horrid events. I think this part of the book really brought the horrible conditions of the stock yards to life throughout the rest of the book. For me this set the tone of the cruelty with which people were treated.
ReplyDeleteThe most memorable part of the book to me was when Jurgis gets his first job at Brown's. He is so proud of himself and optimistic about the future, and he has accomplished his goal of getting a job in America. It was the happiest part of the book, which is why I remember it the most, because everything goes downhill from there and many upsetting and horribly disturbing things occur later.
ReplyDelete"Jurgis turned away, and then in a sudden rush the full realization of his triumph swept over him, and he gave a yell and a jump, and started off on a run. He had a job! He had a job!" (26).
At that point in the story, I was hopeful that maybe things would go decently for the family, even after reading about the hardships described in the wedding scene. Jurgis's optimism and exuberance in this passage made me hopeful, but later I was let down, which is another reason I remember this passage so much. It may not be the most important part, but it still is the passage I remember most.
I also noticed Jurgis' optimism. At the beginning of the book he can't understand why the workers hate their jobs. He is happy just to have work and a way to make money and refuses to acknowledge the dangers that he faces every day in the factory. I also feel that the more Jurgis learns about America and the hardships of everyday life the less optimistic he becomes. He starts to hate his own job and can find hardly any joy in his life other than his son (who dies) and his wife (who dies too). The only thing that seems to make Jurgis happy and optimistic again is his discovery of socialism which makes him hopeful for the future and gives him something to believe in again.
DeleteThe part of the Jungle I am skeptical about is the socialism aspect of the novel. Upton Sinclair was a major socialist figure and was very much involved in the socialist party. Towards the end of the book the focus is less on Jurgis's life but more on the socialist party. This part of the book, I feel, is a little biased. It is a very one sided view towards the problems of the capitalist world and the solutions that socialism offers. Sinclair never mentions any possible issues with socialism and makes it seem like the only solution to the problems facing America at that time. Even Jurgis himself says, "It was so incomprehensible how a man could fail to see it (395)!" This shows Sinclair's strong opinions on the socialist ideals. It is hard to tell how much of the information on socialism is accurate because this book was written to help spread Sinclair's ideas on socialism.
ReplyDeleteWell said Cori, Sinclair provides socialism as the cure for all of their problems and the way it is presented is very matter of fact and so simple. Coming from an admitted socialist, his bias clearly shows through here. Good to be skeptical.
DeleteI definitely agree that the last few chapters are a little biased towards socialism. The last few chapters were all about how evil capitalism was and how great socialism was. It seemed like it was unfair to blame all the problems that Jurgis faced in the book on capitalism. The biggest problem going on in "The Jungle" was corruption. Capitalism probably helped to cause some of the corruption going on in the book but it definitely could not be the sole reason for it. Therefore, Socialism definitely could not solve all of or even most of the people's problems.
DeleteIt would be interesting to learn more about socialism in the 1900s, and the role that it did play in these industries. I wonder if Jurgis would have felt so strongly about socialism had he learned about it early on in the story, when he was positive about his future. Although I liked the idea of Jurgis having a cause to fight for, I think that he was a likely candidate for socialism because he was so wronged by the "system," and I'm not sure if being a socialist was the right choice for Jurgis.
DeleteOne passage regarding capitalism in the story really stood out to me.
“…it was the incarnation of blind and insensate Greed. It was a monster devouring with a thousand mouths, trampling with a thousand hoofs; it was the Great Butcher—it was the spirit of Capitalism made flesh. Upon the ocean of commerce it sailed as a pirate ship; it had hoisted the black flag and declared war upon civilization. Bribery and corruption were its everyday methods. In Chicago the city government was simply one of its branch offices; it stoles billions of gallons of city water openly, it dictated to the courts the sentences of disorderly strikers, it forbade the mayor to enforce the building laws against it…” (265).
Greed is capitalized in this passage, which lead me to associate Greed with being a deity of some sort. This is a very powerful passage, and it really makes the capitalist ways of the government and the industry seem especially evil and horrific. However, we must keep in mind that this was written by a socialist, and this passage seemed to border on being propaganda.
Personally I think that the most memorable scene from the novel was when Jurgis returns home from jail only to find the Irish family living is his house. I think that at this particular moment in the text Jurgis finally realized what he may have previously doubted: that all the rumors he had been told about how it was only a matter of time before all the people who purchased the houses were forced to leave due to financial circumstances. Before this he hadn't been able to believe that poverty could hit someone who was so incredibly eager to work and incredibly able to get the work done.
ReplyDeleteI totally agree with you. Jurgis learned that sometimes even great ambitions can be followed by great failures. He was so dedicated on his work to support his family, he lost sight of reality and that it was family impossible for his family to succeed while living in that house.
Delete*it was impossible
DeleteKelsey, I completely agree with you. Not only does it show how harsh the real estate firm is, but the naivety of the Irish family is so sad to see. You can see that they will soon fall into the cycle of never ending payments with unexpected fees. The fact that she also believed that the home was brand new foreshadows a similar fate to Jurgis.
DeleteOne of the most memorable scenes in The Jungle was the scene on pages 260-264 where Jurgis asks a bartender to give him change for a one hundred dollar bill. The bartender sees that Jurgis is rather poor and is skeptical how and why a poor man is carrying around so much money. Eventually Jurgis buys a beer and doesn't get his change. This ends in a brawl and Jurgis being arrested. In the court, the judge doesn't believe Jurgis' side of the story because he is poor and he trusts the man of higher status. I was outraged at the judge's decision because he didn't give him a fair trial. I wondered if this book also wanted to touch upon the issue of the corruption of the legal system those days. There was no investigation and certainly no servalence cameras that could have been used for evidence. The most shocking part was that the bartender was taking money from a poor man! Not to use a stereotypical comparison, but it was like taking candy from baby. If the baby is upset, the parents will believe the adult's side of the story because they are more "mature". This is similar to Jurgis' situation. No matter what he said or how honest he was, no one would listen. Nowadays there is such thing as reasonable doubt so even if a court case seems easily solved, there could always be missing pieces that may be in favor of the defendant. I thought that maybe this was touching on the subject of corruption in the legal system and perhaps politics were also involved...
ReplyDeleteI just realized that I repeated myself in my comment about the legal system corruption and it was redundant.
ReplyDeleteNear the beginning of the novel when Jurgis and his family have their tour of Packingtown is one of the most memorable parts of "The Jungle" for me. The thing about this scene that I remembered was the description of the smells and sounds there. The smell is described as "...A strange, pungent odor. They were not sure that it was unpleasant, this odor; some might have called it sickening, but their taste in odors was not developed, and they were only sure that it was curious." p.23. It is interesting because the family has no idea what they are getting themselves into. They came all the way from Lithuania to America looking to get steady lives for their children. When they finally get there they find that it is far from what they expected to be a healthy place for living and working. Upton Sinclair is so descriptive about the conditions in the stockyards. These examples that he gives lead to his main point in the novel that capitalism is bad. Near the end of "The Jungle" there are a few chapters dedicated to Jurgis learning about Socialism. Sinclair is trying to tell his readers that Socialism is a good alternative to a capitalist economy.
ReplyDeleteTo be quite honest, I didn't even consider the title of Upton Sinclair's novel while reading it. However, upon answering the summer reading questions, I realized that the title, "The Jungle", relates to a multitude of topics touched upon the the book!
ReplyDeleteWhen I think of the word "jungle", the Amazon rainforest comes to mind. It is a super foreign territory where there are predators constantly lurking. You need skills to survive and are in constant competition with your fellow creatures for food. There are also a great diversity with the animal population.
As you can already tell, there are many connections between the actual jungle and the one described in circa-1900 Chicago. Jurgis and Ona are Lithuanian peasants who come to America with ambition to prosper. Alongside a flood of European immigrants of different countries, they compete for any job they can get. Sinclair describes capitalism as a system where the poorest of the poor compete from jobs by working for lower pay/worse conditions, while the rich get richer by reaping additional profit. He also provides an animal kingdom-esque passage about this unbalanced relationship "He was like a wounded animal in the forest; he was forced to compete with his enemies upon unequal terms" (189). As the many injuries clearly indicate, it's vital to work and stay unharmed. Chicago transforms Jurgis into a "one-man-for-himself" kind of guy who left to fend for himself.
I completely agree with you Kayla! The packing district in Chicago have a survival of the fittest lifestyle, just like you would find in the Jungle. If a worker became injured or lost their job, then they would have a hard time surviving because these people need to work in order to feed and shelter themselves. I liked what you said about how Sinclair describes capitalism. He emphasized in his book on several occasions saying, "All day long the gates of the packing houses were besieged by starving and penniless men; they came literally, by the thousands every single morning, fighting with each other for a chance for life" (83).
DeleteI also think that the title could refer to the dangerous working conditions. A jungle is full of dangerous obstacles and could be compared with the packing district.
Just a devil's advocate response to Katelyn and Kayla; could you consider the "wild jungle" somewhat controlled by people with political power/wealth, for example, Mike Scully or the owner of Durham's butchery? Despite the "fend for yourself" attitude Jurgis experienced in his arrival in America, wouldn't you agree that the poverty was almost controlled by corrupt officials and the members of the local government?
DeletePersonally, the scene I found most memorable for some reason was when Jurgis is first put in prison, is given a cell mate who's name is Jack Duane and they start a conversation. It is true that "nor could he help being interested in the conversation with Duane--the first educated man with whom he had ever talked." (173). At this time and later on in the story, Jurgis learns from Jack, and not always good things but he does learn how to survive. I think this adds to the theme of the novel because it shows how later on when Jurgis and Jack perform criminal activities in order to profit, its really the only way they can survive well. Also, what adds to that point is later on when Jurgis visits prison for the second time, Jurgis learns from the prisoners: "but now he was free to listen to these men, and to realize that he was one of them--that their point of view was his point of view, and that the way they kept themselves alive in the world was the way he meant to do it in the future." (266). When we are told Jurgis' story, it is written in a way that we are on Jurgis' side and we pity he and his family. So, I believe that by putting the prisoners (whom we normally look down upon) on Jurgis' level, we see how corrupt the system of the time is, because it is putting all the 'good' people in jail.
ReplyDeleteI also found that the scene in which Jurgis is put in prison to be memorable but yet i dont completely understand the ending part where you talk about putting Jurgis on teh criminals level to show the corruption.
DeleteI felt that the scene was more memorable because one he learns upon realease his family is gone and has been kicked out by the realestate agent. Secondly because Jack Duane is one of the only characters in the book to show him that you can live a life beyond the factories even if its not honest. Yet reguardless it is still a life and a much better one than the one Jurgis was currently living in. Also Jack Duane became his first memorable friend in the book for reasons that didnt envolve money showing that some people are truely honest in the book and all of the honest people seem to be locked up for crime's which are not honest.
While reading this book the topic of the jungle stuck in my head yet i always aquited it to the fact he was in a big city or jungle until i read the question asking us to explain the significance at which i knew that was not the reason and that i should rethink my ideas. This led to an hour long debate and argument about actually being meaning to the title. I found that when i literally compared it to a jungle nothing seemed to work for me but when i compared it to the idea of a jungle it all made sense.
ReplyDeleteThe idea around a jungle is survival of the fittest or that only the strong survive which fits quite nicely into this book. Throughout the book many people die because they are not strong enough or just not fit to be in the "jungle" some of these people are little stanislovas, antanas(both), ona, Jack Duane, and the other thousands of people who would annually die during the winter. In almost all of these cases the people were not strong enough to survive like stanislovas who was eaten by rats because he got drunk during his job and passed out or both of the antanas one because he couldnt swim the other from very bad chemical burns, then theres ona who died during child birth. All of these people had a lack of strength or a lack of will making them weak and suseptable to die. The only one who didn't die is Jack Duane and he was forced out of the story due to bad circumstances which shows that even the strongest dont always survive because nature has a way of randomly killing the strong as well. Yet this is beside the point that i discovered and figured could only be the real possible explanation for why the book is called the Jungle.
The part of "The Jungle" that I found most memorable was in chapter 7 where Sinclair described with great detail the horendous working conditions in the factories. This passage really showed me just how much Jurgis and his family had to go through to make just enough money to get by on. Antanas died because of his work in a cold damp basement. Ona and Jurgis couldn't get a day off of work after their wedding day. The workers just about killed themselves working in the freezing cold each day, and almost killed each other working in the steam of the killing beds. "The men would tie up their feet in newspapers and old sacks, and these would be soaked in blood and frozen, and then soaked again, and so on, until by nighttime a man would be walking on great lumps the size of the feet of an elephant. Now and then, when the bosses were not looking, you would see them plunging their feet and ankles into the steaming hot carcass of the steer, or darting across the room to the hot-water jets. The cruelest thing of all was that nearly all of them-- all of those who used knives--were unable to wear gloves, and their arms would be white with frost and their hands would grow numb, and then of course there would be accidents."(chapter 7) These conditions are an important part of the scheme of "The Jungle" because it shows just how cruel America was to Jurgis. This cruelty also led Jurgis to hold some of the many values and thoughts of society that brought him to become a Socialist. This scene, although gruesome put alot of reason behind the decisions that Jurgis makes later in life.
ReplyDeleteThe Jungle had several scenes that really stuck out to me, but the one in particular is the scene where Master Freddie gives Jurgis a $100 bill. Jurgis is begging on the street when Master Freddie comes up to him and starts rambling on about his problems. Master Freddie gives Jurgis $100 and then brings him home with him to feed him until the butler kicked him out of the house. This scene stuck out for several reasons. For one thing, Master Freddie is drunk, which adds a bit of comedy into the gloomy novel. It also shows that the rich have their own problems too. The part that stuck out most to me is the part where Jurgis ended up being beaten and arrested for trying to break the $100. This shows how corrupt the whole society was. The bartender cheated him out of his money and made it look like Jurgis was the one who caused it. Sinclair also writes that, “… poor Jurgis could not know … that the pugilist bartender was one of the most trusted henchmen of Democratic leader of the district, and had helped only a few months before to hustle out a record-breaking vote at a testimonial to the magistrate, who had been made the target of odious kid-gloved reformers” (265). This scene enforces the idea of corruption in the government and adds on to the long list of Jurgis’s troubles.
ReplyDeleteI also found this scene very memorable, however for different reasons. I think that by including this scene in the novel, Sinclair is trying to make a statement about the occasional act of charity in a Capitalist Society. I believe that he is trying to say that the few acts of charity that come between countless acts of greed do not have a significant impact on the lives of those who experience both the charity and the greed. To explain, Jurgis is given the $100 bill, but the money does not improve his situation or his life in the slightest. In reality, the act of charity from Master Freddie gets Jurgis Beaten, and arrested. That is why i believe this act of charity is ironically a statement from Sinclair about greed.
DeleteI saw this as another way for Sinclair to show how bad capitalism is. I found that throughout the book Sinclair in some very small way always manages to slip in a socialist thought or anti-capitalist passage. It is this which made the book hard to read at some points especially at the end. The socialist society and all of its connections in Chicago got to become very tiring. Sinclair reminds me of Ayn Rand.
DeleteI believe that the meaning and message from the book can be taken from the title, "The Jungle" itself. Personally, when I think of a jungle, I think of organized chaos, survival of the fittest, uncontrollable forces, savagery, and most importantly, the largest predators feeding on smaller or even the smallest of animals.
ReplyDeleteThese five characteristics of jungles can all be seen in the story itself. For example, when Jurgis first hears that his wife, Ona, has been raped by her employer, Mr. Connor, Jurgis explodes in a frenzy of savage rage and marches over to the factory where Mr. Connor works and maliciously attacks the man without a second thought. Sinclair describes this situation and Jurgis' savagery in the following way, "In a flash he had bent down and sunk his teeth into the man's cheek, and when they tore him away he was dripping with blood, and little ribbons of skin were hanging in his mouth." (pg. 162)
Overall, Upton Sinclair uses the characteristics of your typical jungle in nature, with all of its danger, chaos and savagery, to describe the characteristics of a Capitalist Society. In particular, how human beings, in a capitalist society, will lie, cheat and steal from other human beings in order to better themselves and their well-being. And it is these human ethics that Upton Sinclair uses to belittle the "American Dream" and the Capitalist fundamentals on which America is built upon.
Jurgis’ story in The Jungle was written by Sinclair with effectiveness in mind not realism and certainly not reliability. He wanted to shock people with his book, but in doing so, certain details were probably stretched. The problems in Jurgis’ life were most likely based on stories that Sinclair had heard during his time investigating in the stockyards, but for every piece of the plotline to happen to a single guy over the course of a just few years is highly unlikely.
ReplyDeleteEven just as an author, Sinclair’s reliability was extremely shaky. He was a politician (someone who lies for a living) not an unbiased journalist in search of the truth. The Jungle was written only to make big corporations, such as the meat packing industry, look bad while glorifying the dream of socialism. When Sinclair was working in the stockyards he was looking for injustices. While there may have been plenty of these to choose from did he ever try to see any good in the stock yards at all? The life of immigrants was hard, but the dystopia described was a scene set up with just the right situations to tell his message. There probably were some families just that miserable in Chicago, but Sinclair scraped the very bottom of the sob stories barrel and mushed everything he found into one big ball to present as the ‘average lifestyle in the stockyards’. In the end, The Jungle simply cannot be counted as a credible source for anything other than an example of socialist propaganda.
Overall if I had to choose one scene that meant the most it was when he lost his house. That moment could sum up many of his past and future experiences with the loss and tragedy. The house meant so much to him and to be able to see him there at the house that he believed was his, and to be greeted by a stranger stuck out. I had always seen how he literally devoted every part of him and his family. Each time he makes a sacrifice such as his foot or is forced to find a new job it is in the hope of finally owning his house. When you put this in the scope of what we do each day you realize just how hard they fought for something we take for granted. The house was in Jurgis's case the American dream. To be able to finally own a house in packingtown is the ironic part. Even if he did make every payment for the rest of his life he would still live in packingtown and be forced to work there. That as why I also always so it as the poor mans burden.
ReplyDelete
ReplyDeleteThis topic is pretty good and the writer's views are buy wow gold unique and not so hard to World of Warcraft Gold understand.I like it very much, and wow gold way I want to share some
interesting and very useful websites to you:www.safewow.com! Iam sure you can find out funny things there.